Science is all rubbish, let's go live in caves

It could only be letters. Patent pending, of course

Common Topics

So we'll move from intelligently designed hydrogen, to intelligently designed science classes and their associated lawsuits:

I note with interest that, even when the Roman Catholic Church itself stresses the importance of science, the bible-thumpers do not relent.

Is that integrism, or what ?

They are right about one thing though, if ever Intelligent Design is indeed proven (read : we find that God does irrefutably exist), then we will have one of the greatest paradigm shifts in human history.

I'm just not entirely sure that the people who have forgotten about "Thou Shalt Not Kill" will be the best placed in the new order that will undoubtedly arise. After all, there were quite a few bible-thumpers who agreed with the war in Iraq. I don't think that will go off so well if ID is proven to exist.

Pascal.

"It" can't be /that/ intelligent if we can see the joins ... probably a glitch in the Matrix ...

Regards, Mike

This week the European Space Agency said the Greenland icesheet is thickening in the island's interior:

"If the Greenland ice sheet were to melt entirely, it would raise global sea levels by seven metres. The addition of such a large quantity of fresh water to the oceans would also disrupt familiar ocean currents, such as the gulf stream, which could have a huge knock on effect on weather systems."

Probably floating the Weddel Ice Sheet in the process and causing it to break free. Which would then cause the Antarctic glaciers behind it to slide into the sea too, raising sea levels even further ...

I think it's this bit of Antarctica, but I gather it's about a quarter of the continent and it has lost and gained its ice cover several times within recorded geological history.

If a quarter of the Antarctic ice sheet ends up in the sea ... OUCH!

Cheers, Wol

A little misleading on the measurement side: (but good info nonetheless)

The sensor can time this journey down to the nanosecond, ESA says, meaning that the instrument is accurate to within two centimetres.

a nanosecond equates to 30 centimetres for radar, not two centimetres. It is more likely that the sensor measures to sub-nanoseconds, which is not too difficult to do these days.

(c = 3x10^8 m/s = 30cm/ns) or google "3e8 m/s to cm/ns".

Derek

We'll have to take your word for that Derek (and the several other readers who wrote in along similar lines). Calculators are awfully hard to work when you only have vulture claws, so we were inclined to go with the numbers on the European Space Agency site.

Greenland's ice sheets getting thicker but melting at the edges? Just goes to show *noone* knows what is happening to the climate, what is driving climate change, or even if climate change really exists.

With results like this its entirely possible ocean levels will drop rather than rise over the next century, as thickening continental ice sheets more than compensate for losses elsewhere.

If climate change fanatics cant even get changes in ocean levels right, maybe its time to call time on the whole debate and let real scientists get on with their investigations, so we can really know what action, if any, needs to be taken.

Eric

Er, calm down Eric. No-one said that there was a net gain in ice cover, and we're not sure the European Space Agency qualify as climate change fanatics...

Psychologists reckon just looking at beer can make a person all tetchy. You wondered more about the methodology of psychologists:

The conclusion from those experiments doesn't make sense, at least to me. Surely those more likely to accept a level of aggression to be the norm would be the ones less likely to recognise it. Hence those who do recognise it must be in an alcohol induced relaxed state!

I'll punch anyone who disagrees :c)

Steve

Interesting take on the results of this study. Now, I haven't read the study myself, but from the information presented, it looks like someone, somewhere down the chain may have misinterpreted something.

I got the impression that the conclusion should have been that "Looking at pictures of alcohol (or weapons) make you more sensitive to aggression.", not necessarily more aggressive yourself.

Jim

Both of these experiments appear to be measuring participants' association between images of alcohol and violence, not whether those images make the participants themselves aggressive.

In the first case, juxtaposing images of alcohol with the stories of conflict hints to the participants that the characters may have consumed the alcoholic beverages shown; the result reveals a presumption on the part of the participants that an intoxicated protagonist is more likely to be acting aggressively (perhaps because a sober person would have better judgment and only enter a conflict if it was essential or very well justified?).

The second experiment is simple word-association: it shows people associate alcoholic pictures with violent words. Again this does not indicate whether or not the participants have become more aggressive during the experiment, and the reasons for such association may be somewhat indirect - for example one notices the aggressive tendances of drunk "yobs" far more when one is sober. Therefore a tea-totaller may associate alcohol with aggressiveness more strongly than one who likes a tipple every now and again.

Personally, I'm less aggressive when drunk than when sober, and this example of drawing the wrong conclusions from an experiment has made me mad. Grrr. I need a drink to calm myself down.

It's amazing the lengths car companies will go to in order to allow unsafe drivers to remain on the road. Even if the cars companies do universally adopt the system, what about other road users who don't have space for such complicated electronics? I can already see the uproar as the number of cries of "Sorry Mate, I Didn't See You!" skyrockets as car drivers mow down swathes of motorcyclists without bothering to even look, safe in the knowledge their car will do their thinking for them.

Cheers!

Lisa

You wrote about a Cadillac: > One of these warnings is a vibration of the driver's right leg

Is this by any chance provided by an irritatingly yappy small dog trying to hump it? If so, it could be a bit of a traffic hazard in its own right.

Arthur

As usual car manufacturers totally forget that roads are also used by pedestrians, pedal bikes and motorcycles, which are not laden with electronics (except maybe the pedestrian with the mandatory iPod).

Speaking of motocycles, one may wonder what trick they will play to attract the attention of Harley owners, since they naturally produce all kinds of vibrations.

Bertrand

A car with built-in vibrators? Are they talking new technology or the birth of the Flynt mobile? Tactile feedback indeed.

Scott

Lester Haines, introduces the notion of a vibrating alert as an anti-crash mechanism for Cadilacs. Is the vibration going to be different from that used in my mobile phone. How will I know when I'm being sent a text or about to commit highway carnage?

Lets hope it doesn't use bluetooth and get confused with Lester's bluetooth vibrator.

(http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/10/28/bluetooth_device/)

Richard

And that's all she wrote. We'll be back with another slice of your brains on Friday.